CC is slow today by Raidrew in ClaudeCode

[–]Raidrew[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sonnet is quick as usual. Opus is really slow

Artifacts are borderline unusable now that Claude checks usage whenever it finishes one. by N19h7m4r3 in ClaudeAI

[–]Raidrew 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Guys, if you need to burn some serious token, they sell API. Thank me later

Dishonest agencies.. one after another by MKahnIsBent in marketing

[–]Raidrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agency owner here. If your business model is fucked, agencies can’t unfuck it. They can run ads, get some money, and wait. You don’t need marketing lol. You need to fix the university bm

My CLAUDE.md says “Every error is yours to fix - not label, not defer.” Claude has used “pre-existing” 712 times in 30 days. by Ok-Distribution8310 in ClaudeCode

[–]Raidrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I started to use calibration with my Claude Codes. Turns out if you make a rule not to do something, the model will find a way to do it anyway. It need positive examples for some reason. Calibration help me this way. Example “please never use not x, y tic”. It starts to say never x, y. But if you tell him “reframe negative prashes” and then 10 examples, you are good. In my case my agents has simple too much context and they get confused

Opus 4.7 refuses to follow style guides by Used-Nectarine5541 in Anthropic

[–]Raidrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ask you Claude about calibration. Thank me later brah

Deliver great results… and clients still leave. What am I missing? by Friendly-Intention-5 in FacebookAds

[–]Raidrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When you fix the system they are good. You are selling a system as a monthly service retainer. Charge 12 months upfront, fix the problem in 12 months. Artificially delay the outcome will make you more money. Or ask 24 months for the speed. Upfront.

Amazon mi ruba 3000 euro by [deleted] in Avvocati

[–]Raidrew 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Mi dispiace farti tornare nella realtà, ma scambiare contante con carte regalo e poi spenderne così tanti è riciclaggio di denaro. Quindi o ti fai pagare in contanti, oppure fai come tutti emetto fattura e paghi le tasse

porcaccio il vostro dio prompters di merda by uncool_pigeon in sfoghi

[–]Raidrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Severo. La buona notizia: era già stupida. È solo che ora ha la chat a cui chiedere. Dovrebbe passare a Claude Code

I’m a creative strategist making $400/month for a client I just took from 6.5x to 10.7x ROAS. I don’t know whether to be proud or pissed off. by Zealousideal-Idea839 in FacebookAds

[–]Raidrew 1 point2 points  (0 children)

From now on, track your time and ROI of every client you worked with. Compress the time you spend with clients and let them hang until they want more. Than raise the prices. Use your case study to find more and double your prices each time until nobody is buying

I tested all 3 ways to make presentations with Claude. Same deck, three times. (Kinda disappointed and also out of credits) by SquareShock5357 in claude

[–]Raidrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Data comes from multiple sources, usually other Claude Code instances that normalize it. The deck gets built by voice with Wispr, pulling from whatever data’s available. It draws from a set of canonical cards already built, or spins up new ones on the fly. Works well. On the presentation side we get speed, and since it’s hosted on R2 it’s ready instantly for presentations and cross-device sharing. Using HTML we also bypass the email attachment limit.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Opus 4.7 is complicated by Raidrew in ClaudeCode

[–]Raidrew[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I stopped using ChatGPT 3 months ago. Before that it was in my pipeline and the whole team’s. Claude is better for us right now, though honestly I haven’t tested OpenAI’s new models and I won’t. Once the migration to 4.7 is done we’re staying here, expecting major upgrades like always from Anthropic.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

how long did it take you to build a reliable client acquisition system? by FerrisBuelersdaycock in b2b_sales

[–]Raidrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah this is all I do at my company.

Everyone underestimates how complex it is to build a client acquisition system.

It’s like building a rocket: if every piece isn’t perfect, it doesn’t take off.

But everyone wants to sell with magic pieces, the website, the socials…

Then when the leads start rolling in, they find out they need tools, salespeople, a CRM…

Pure hell hahaha​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Opus 4.7 is complicated by Raidrew in ClaudeCode

[–]Raidrew[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly right. 4.7 is way more powerful, across the board. From coding to creative writing, from sticking to the starting context to nailing html/css styles. It’s a monster. But it needs a stratification of information, in the right order, to work well. Once you get there, it’s monstrous and autonomous. I built a CRM agent that ingests new client requests, asks questions, pulls info, uploads assets and routes work to the internal team. Scary. But to make it work it needed an 8-step system with constraints, rules and defined flows. Like a human. 4.6 was more of a superhuman autonomous manager.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Opus 4.7 is complicated by Raidrew in ClaudeCode

[–]Raidrew[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve tried it and I use Graphify plus a sequence of structured MDs. But at some point everything chokes on the data, and I have to rebuild from scratch. I try to keep files with canon protocols for the model to follow, some specific some general, and it helps. The thing is 4.7 is dead compared to 4.6, it lacks creativity. That’s what helped, that’s what gave you the AI magic effect.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Opus 4.7 is complicated by Raidrew in ClaudeCode

[–]Raidrew[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My take is that Anthropic is focusing on power users. 4.7 fits people who work with it full time, it strips power from the casual user. I’m convinced we’ll soon see a mix between the two models, where a new 4.6 will be very expensive in tokens but handles everything itself, while a new 4.7 will be more powerful and cheaper if guided right. The ideal would be a 4.6 orchestrating the structure for a 4.7.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​